MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Streamflow Regime Changes in Canada

2021· dataset· en· W4207064518 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Masoud Zaerpour

Bibliographic record

VenueHydroShare Resources · 2021
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStreamflowEnvironmental scienceClimatologyGeographyGeologyCartographyDrainage basin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Streamflow regime types are identified for the 105 natural Canadian stations using Fuzzy C-Means (FCM) algorithm. The stations are extracted from Reference Hydrometric Basin Network (RHBN, Water Survey of Canada, 2017, http://www.wsc.ec.gc.ca/) for the period of 1966-2010 to classify streams into a set of six overlapping regime types during the common period. These streamflow regime classes include (1) slow-response/warm-season peak (2) fast-response/warm-season peak (3) slow-response/freshet peak (4) fast-response/freshet peak (5) slow-response/cold-season peak (6) fast-response/cold-season peak. Here, we visualize the shapes of annual hydrographs in the six archetype streams during the baseline period of 1966-1975 and show how they evolve to the last decadal period of 2001-2010. More information on how the six flow regime types are derived and a detailed description of each regime type can be found in Zaerpour et al. (2020). Zaerpour, M., Hatami, S., Sadri, J., and Nazemi, A.: A novel algorithmic framework for identifying changing streamflow regimes: Application to Canadian natural streams (1966–2010), Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss. [preprint], https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2020-334, in review, 2020.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.016
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.016

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.184 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueHydroShare ResourcesSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207